slamspurs

No, the Patriots already have their franchise QB. Drake Maye is gonna be at least a middling QB. 

The draft class is weak. Atlanta and Denver were smart to reach and draft Penix and Nix last season.

Anyone tanking for Shadeur Sanders? Sanders frame isn't going to hold up to NFL hits. Cam Ward will probably end up being more Dwayne Haskins than CJ Stroud. 

Marvin Harrison Jr. isn't even going to crack 1,000 yards this season. 

It was a good matchup for him. It feels like everyone scores 30 points against the Colts.

He had some good games when he was with Denver. I thought he had potential if he had time to continue to develop. Yeah, he's on his third team in 3 years, but he hasn't shown me any consistency other than he can get one big win a year. 

The Giants are a team that can get good quickly with the right coach and QB. Malik Nabers is a stud. Tyrone Tracy is a nice back, and lots of young receivers on that team. 

As a Washington fan, I was pretty irritated that the Giants jumped up and grabbed Daniel Jones who was mocked to us that season. We ended up with Dwayne Haskins and because of that we didn't grab Tua or Herbert the season after, which is pretty annoying, but it worked out with us finally getting Daniels this season.

If the Giants had Daniels and a Kliff Kingsbury, they'd be a dangerous team. 

And for the record, I wasn't high on Daniels either. His numbers were awful at Arizona State. But I've seen it enough times to realize that people transfer for a reason, and the right coach can really maximize someone's potential.

Consider that these dudes were all transfers (off the top of my head): Joe Burrow, Jayden Daniels, Baker Mayfield, Bo Nix, Kyler Murray, Jalen Hurts. 

Was watching a video talking about the game.

Dude pointed out that Green Bay has lost to every team they've played that has 9 wins this year (prior to this week).

(Minnesota, Detroit (2x), Philly). 

He was wrong though, Houston has 9 wins and they beat them, but did not cover. 

This was the featured game of the week, but in actuality Green Bay didn't really have much to play for other than seeding. Like who cares if they're a 4, 5, 6, or even 7 seed. Minnesota had more to play for. I didn't realize they had a realistic chance at the 1 seed with how well Detroit has played all season. 

Green Bay will be fine. They're in Jordan Love's second full year as a starter, and he's a sure fire franchise QB. 

Sucks, I took the Broncos +3.5 on Saturday cuz I'm almost positive they'll make the playoffs. Unfortunately, at -7.5 it becomes not worth it, especially since they can back their way in if Pitt beats Cincy as only a 2 point dog. 

I just want them to get rid of that stupid new kickoff rule.

The NFL is a business even more than college. These dudes get paid millions of dollars and take hits from grown men. They want to get OT over as quickly as possible. 

Nah, if you were looking at the live line u knew u were fucked early.

Cincy was down 0-3 and the line was Cincy -3.5 somehow with the ball on their own 30. Vegas knew. 

Chiefs are doing it with defense, which is a progression through the years. 

I dunno about you, but the prospect of going for 3 championships in a row for the first time in the history of the NFL sounds exciting to me. 

Stats aside, you know Mahomes is one of the best to ever do it. If they gave him an AJ Brown or a Ceedee Lamb, Jamar Chase, or even a Brian Thomas this team would be putting up a lot more points than they have been. Instead they have a Kelce who is great, but likely going to retire after this season. And they have Pacheco who is a nice player, but he's no Jonathan Taylor, Saquon type game changer.

Nothing wrong with a team with an elite QB, great coach, and great defense winning again if they do. 

What are u worried about. Saints have to score 2 tds to cover. 

The other guy put up 0 first half as well. What choices do they have. 

Not a good weekend, or really season for dog players other than the first month. 

Hate these types of games. You really look like a genius or a fool. Zero reason to be taking the Saints tonight. 

Gonna be 27-3 or 17-16. 

This is one of those predictions nobody pays attention to. Cuz if you're right about a 6 or a 9 to 1 you can brag and claim you're a genius. But nobody can really come back and rag on you for it, because it was a long shot anyways. 

Yeah, I'll say New Orleans loses by 1 pt 

Thanks Claw. I was going in too many directions this week. You helped clear things up for me. 

I've tried to play contrarian with this series for years now, and it never works. The games are always close.

The underdog is 9-1 ATS in the last 10. Just take the points or you'll be kicking yourself. Especially after the Steelers looked like garbage last week and the Ravens and Lamar had 5 TDs. 

Yeah not lookin good for Arizona. Looks like SF has a better chance of covering than them. 

Not to be a smartass Wizer, but If Seattle is "done" as you say, why do you need to tease Arizona up to +8 and couple them with SF +8 in a teaser, rather than just playing Arizona straight up? 

There's a guy on youtube that's mentioned multiple times that the "Off a Bye Week" angle is a fictional strength. 

Yes, there are famous coaches that do really well off bye weeks. I think it's like Andy Reid and John Harbaugh. 

But according to the data, most teams are under .500 ATS coming off their bye week. Colin Cowherd mentions "off a bye" all the time. It's an old school mentality, like people who say you need to change your oil every 3,000 miles. 

IT'S NOT TRUE! But it's so baked into gambler's mindsets, that they'll never shake it. You'll be hearing off a bye week as a positive til the end of time. 

Been tracking the line since Sunday night. From what I've seen, Seattle opened at -1, then Arizona went to pickem or -1, now it's mixed. I'd say most places have Seattle -1.5 right now with extra juce on AZ. Caesars has it at pickem with juice on Seattle, and MGM is the lone book with Pickem ML -110 or Arizona -1.

So from what I've seen, the line is moving in Seattle's direction early in the week. 

I don't think the line will matter either way who is eventually the -1 or -1.5 or -2.5 here, as long as it's not hitting the key -3/+3 number. The ML on either side is pretty much pickem, unlike the GB/SF game where SF ML is +120. 

The question for me is who is the better team here.

Yes, the Cardinals has won 1 more game than the Seahawks.

Seattle has played 2 games without Kenneth Walker (won both), and 2 games without DK Metcalf (both home losses).

Arizona’s core of Murray, Conner, Harrison Jr., and McBride have missed a total of one game this season.

Arizona is off two blowout wins against the Jets who despite the talent are 3-8, and the Bears who have lost 4 games in a row. The wins look nice on paper, but are those good teams?

Let’s just say for the sake of argument that Arizona is the better team here.

My question is, how much better is Arizona than Seattle? A lot better or a little better?

Another streak to consider.

Seattle has beaten Arizona 5 games in a row…. overall.

I agree that the Bears could have gotten a king's ransom for Caleb Williams, but I think they did okay. 

Why are we on the Justin Fields bandwagon still? The guy got benched by a very respected coach while having a winning record, in favor of a guy whose career was supposedly over (Russell Wilson). Russ is 3-0, with the offense averaging 30.33 points a game. Justin Fields lost to Dallas this season .

Fields doesn't have the It Factor. True franchise QBs you typically know it within the first few games. Fields has played for 4 years and still hasn't proven that he has it. 

Just some quick examples of franchise QBs and their quick evolution.

Joe Burrow had 6 TD passes and three 300 yard passing games in his first 4 games on a Cincy team that had the worst record in the league the season prior. You knew Burrow was good from the very beginning. 

Patrick Mahomes had 284 yards passing in a his first ever start and won the super bowl his first year starting.

Lamar Jackson ran a lot his first season. Basically a RB like Fields, but had 36 TDs and 6 INTs the year after and won an MVP. 

Josh Allen steadily got better, but had MVP type stats by his third year. 

Jordan Love had 6 TD passes his first 2 games last season, slumped a bit in between then finished off strong in his first year a starter. 

Justin Herbert had 31 TDs and 10 INTs in his rookie season. You knew he was a franchise QB from the preseason basically. 

Jayden Daniels is actually a good comp. His first few games, not a lot of TD passes, not a long of yards, but productive as a runner. Now he's averaging roughly 250 yards a game afterwards, and doesn't have double digit carries in his last 6 games because he's evolving as a passer. 

CJ Stroud is another one. but you get the point by now. None of these guys you were in year 4 and wondering if they were any good still.  

You could argue that I am only naming true franchise QBs, but if you go through the list of teams that you would consider having franchise QBs, it's more than you think, and most of them were pretty decent from the beginning, or picked up the game quickly. If you're excited about your team turning a guy into a glorified game manager after 5 years on the team, go ahead. 

I'm a proponent of drafting a QB every year until you find the franchise QB. You can usually offload their contract to someone on potential alone afterwards.